Woods Vs Federer

[Jarro]

Who's the more dominant player in their sport ?

After watching Roger carve Roddick a new one last night, i couldn't help but think that this guy is sooo much better than anyone else around at the moment. Not a bad achievement considering the amount of very good players around at this present stage.

Is Roger better than Tiger ? Interesting to compare their overall records i'd imagine.

[goughy]

You really can't compare both sports. I was thinking of this myself last night. They are both dominant in their sports. How many tournaments did federer play last year for how many wins? How many did tiger play?

When tiger plays a tournament he is directly competing against 100+ other people. When federer plays a tournament, there may be 100+ people in the field, but he only has to beat say 7 of them.

I'm not belittleling his results. Just showing how I feel a direct comparison is not possible.

I read somewhere that tiger and federer met last year and are now friends.

I also read that annika and tiger sms each other when they win another major. Something akin to "+1"

[AndyP]

When tiger plays a tournament he is directly competing against 100+ other people. When federer plays a tournament, there may be 100+ people in the field, but he only has to beat say 7 of them.
I see it differently. Unless he is playing matchplay, Tiger doesn't directly play against anyone. He is playing against the course.

Federer goes head-to-head against everyone he beats.
Federer won 12 titles last year, his win-loss record since 2004 is 247-15, and he's made the last 7 Grand Slam Finals.
Obviously, I think Federer is the most dominant.

[Jarro]

I'm sure they stated last night that Federer has a win/loss record of 118/4 after winning the first set.

Pretty impressive stat that.

[AndyP]

I'm sure they stated last night that Federer has a win/loss record of 118/4 after winning the first set.

Pretty impressive stat that.
Lleyton beat him from 2 sets to love down in a Davis Cup match in 2002 (I think). I doubt he'd be able to pull that off again.
Nadal lost the first set to him in last year's French Open final, as well.
There's two of them, but that stat above must be for a certain period of time, and not his career.

[Courty]

Meh. I'm over the hype. Tiger's a hack.

[Grunt]

Federer does not give anyone a chance, Even with Tiger in an event you have a slight chance, with Federer no has any hope other than himself getting injured.

[Moe Norman]

impossible to say, they are both quite possibly the greatest players either sport has seen.

Tiger at 30 is beyond the halfway mark to record major titles.

Fed at 25 is beyong the halfway mark to recod major titles.

Tiger will likely dominate for another 10 years, Fed may only have 5.

Impossible to say...

[Grunt]

I honestly think Tiger will become less dominant in the future as he has already said that his family will come first. He has changed his priorities in life i think.

[Courty]

Moe has a point. To get a true indication, we'll probably have to wait until both have retired, then review their achievements.

[Grunt]

When they retire there will be a new Champ in each sport. It has alway been the the way of things.

[AndyP]

Moe has a point. To get a true indication, we'll probably have to wait until both have retired, then review their achievements.
Re the poll question, as is, the "'s" in "who's" is for is, not was or will be?

[Courty]

Re the poll question, as is, the "'s" in "who's" is for is, not was or will be?

Point taken. I voted Federer.

[Moe Norman]

Federer can be beaten when playing at or close to his best. As shown by Safin in 2005 Aussie Open and Nadal in 2006 French Open.

Tiger anywhere near his best is untouchable. thats the difference for me.

[Grunt]

Well Vote for him Moe, he needs someone to vote for him.

[cazandpaul]

Tiger - as previously stated he has to play the entire field and the vagaries of the course.

Federer needs to win the French to be considered truly great.

[marcel]

Federer needs to win the French to be considered truly great.

And Tiger needs to win on oiled sand greens to complete his portfolio, til then he's a pretender

[cazandpaul]

And you don't think he could if they ever scheduled a major on them?

[AndyP]

How many surfaces has Tiger won on?
Federer has won slams on three different surfaces against fields of 128.

[Eag's]

Andy if you want to talk surfaces than Tiger would be miles ahead.
Tennis is played on a consistent surface (most of the time) where golf
as you know is anything but.

There a lot more elements that have to be considered as well, tennis at times is played indoors, golf is not.
They rarely play tennis in the rain, where in golf they will play on etc...

Tiger gets my vote :smt002

[AndyP]

Federer has to play against players with varying amounts of top spin, slice, pace, serve/volley, big servers, etc.
Tiger doesn't even have to worry about an "opponent".

Either way, for each argument, there is a counter-argument.

[Moe Norman]

Tiger has changed his sport. Federer hasn't.

[goughy]

I wanna see them play a tennis match then matchplay before I cast my vote!!

[terryand]

With Tiger the ball is not moving and he's not running to hit his shot :-s

Terry.

[peter_rs]

Thats what makes golf harder... you only have yourself to blame for mistakes. Hitting a moving ball is easier then you think, and the way the ball travels effects your shot selection (less choices).

I think tiger has done more for his sport.

They are both great and its not fair to compare. tennis is a reaction sport.

[Courty]

Thats what makes golf harder... you only have yourself to blame for mistakes. Hitting a moving ball is easier then you think, and the way the ball travels effects your shot selection (less choices).

OK then. Let's see you drive a golf ball which is coming towards you at 200kmh+! :mrgreen:

[BrisVegas]

Tiger has changed his sport. Federer hasn't.

I think that about sums it up. Tiger's legacy will be longer than Federer's. I've got massive respect for Federer, but I believe Tiger is a once in a generation player.

[dc68]

*Ahem* tiger..... as much as it pains me to say.

[Golf_Novice]

Woods42.86%
Federer 57.14%


How is that a tie???

[dc68]

Tigger gets a special dispensation due to racial villification statutes.

[Golf_Novice]

Blah blah blah... Roger wins :)

[dc68]

.

[Eag's]

It's very simple really, golf is a much harder sport to master than tennis therefore Tiger wins :twisted:

[AndyP]

I guess it is pretty hard to shank a shot in tennis.

I play both competitively and they both have their different challenges. It is a bit unfair to compare, but the question was asked.

[dc68]

It's very simple really, golf is a much harder sport to master than tennis therefore Tiger wins :twisted:



I disagree I find it easier to spank a 280 mtr drive or hit a 10 mtr flop shot with 5ft of green to work with, than get a straight forward dolly volley into play.

[Eag's]

I think it is one of those topics that will have this place going 50/50 no matter how many opinions are raised.
Frankly, I am over it :rolleyes:

[terryand]

i know Tiger has won 2 majors in the last year. but what has he done in the last 12, bet he's nowhere near 9 :shock: :-s

Terry.

[Fishman Dan]

Tiger makes much better acceptance speeches than Federerererer.

[Virgal_Tracy]

True but lets hear an acceptance speech by Woods in Swiss. No, wait. Woods doesn't play outside the US (except for the British) so no need to learn a second language

[Fishman Dan]

English is a 2nd language to Americans ;)

[burger]

I too, have played both competitvely and agree they cannot be really compared. For me the big difference is the how much your relexes and anticiption are required in tennis, which you dont require in golf (unless your hear 'FORE').
For both you have incredible skills and the way Federer won the Aust open without losing a set was totally amazing.

I'd like to hear Connico's opinion on this . . . . .

stu

[AndyP]

I don't believe it. Federer has just lost a match!!!!! :shock:

After winning 41 consecutive matches, and only needing 6 more to break Vilas' record, he has lost to the lucky loser (only got in because someone pulled out), drug cheat Canas in straight sets (7-5 6-2). I'm thinking it has to be some sort of online live scoreboard error. :roll:

[Courty]

Meh, Federer is a hack.
I know a guy who smashes racquets and eats Swiss tennis champs for breakfast. ;)

[AndyP]

.
.
.
.
.
.
<------
.
.
.
.
.
.
:roll:

[goughy]

I heard he had the doc or trainer out on the court several times during the match.

[AndyP]

I blame Sampras for Federer's loss. He would have almost bored Roger to death during their practice.

[Fishman Dan]

Do you think he'll go on to win another 40 games, or has the bubble burst?

[AndyP]

Heading into clay court season, there might be another couple of losses to come, but this run had to end sooner or later.
No mention of an injury in the ATP site article.

http://www.pacificlifeopen.com/1/news/atp3.asp

Canas is just the 11th player to defeat Roger Federer since the Swiss took over as the No. 1 in the ATP Rankings on Feb. 2, 2004. Canas joins Tomas Berdych, Albert Costa, Richard Gasquet, Tim Henman, Dominik Hrbaty, Gustavo Kuerten, Andy Murray, Rafael Nadal (6 times), David Nalbandian and Marat Safin as the only players to defeat Federer as a No. 1.